Citation Nr: 21069648 Decision Date: 11/19/21 Archive Date: 11/19/21 DOCKET NO. 17-63 920 DATE: November 19, 2021 ORDER The issue of whether VA has received new and material evidence to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hip disorder is dismissed. The issue of whether VA has received new and material evidence to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for a cervical disorder is dismissed. Entitlement to an effective date earlier than November 19, 2015, for the grant of a total disability based upon individual unemployability (TDIU) is dismissed. The issue of whether a VA Form 9 received on October 2, 2015, which attempted to perfect an appeal of the issues adjudicated in a February 27, 2014 Statement of the Case was timely is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT On October 13, 2021, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board of Appeals for Veterans' Claims (Board) received notification from the Veteran that a withdrawal of this appeal is requested. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal of the issue of whether VA has received new and material evidence to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hip disorder have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. 2. The criteria for withdrawal of the issue of whether VA has received new and material evidence to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for a cervical disorder have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. 3. The criteria for withdrawal of entitlement to an effective date earlier than November 19, 2015 for the grant of a TDIU have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. 4. The criteria for withdrawal of the issue of whether a VA Form 9 received on October 2, 2015, which attempted to perfect an appeal of the issues adjudicated in a February 27, 2014 Statement of the Case, was timely have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran had active service from January 2002 to January 2006. This matter comes before the Board on appeal from an October 2015 administrative decision and an April 2016 rating decision of an Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Veteran testified before the undersigned in September 2021. Dismissal The Board has jurisdiction where there is a question of law or fact on appeal to the Secretary. 38 U.S.C. § 7104; 38 C.F.R. § 20.104. Under 38 U.S.C. § 7105, the Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed. An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative. Unless an appeal is withdrawn on the record at a hearing, appeal withdrawals must be in writing and must include the name of the veteran, the name of the claimant or appellant if other than the veteran, the applicable VA file number, and a statement that the appeal is withdrawn. If the appeal involves multiple issues, the withdrawal must specify that the appeal is withdrawn in its entirety or list the issue(s) withdrawn from the appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 19.55 (b)(1). Until the appeal is transferred to the Board, an appeal withdrawal is effective when received by the AOJ; thereafter it is not effective until received by the Board. 38 C.F.R. § 19.55 (b)(3). On October 13, 2021, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran that he desired to withdraw "any appeal," including the "neck, knee, back, hip and other related issues" and "any appeal regarding initial back payments to any of the current circumstances." Therefore, no case or controversy remains. As such, the Board dismisses the appeal. Tiffany Dawson Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Sopko, Counsel The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.